12/15/2009 1:45:00 PM Fence creates stir at council Attorney argues for wall on Route 66 property
Patrick Whitehurst/WGCN
Those in attendance for the Dec. 10 regular meeting of Williams City Council listened to a number of arguments for allowing a wall to be built on the south end of the property where Jessica's Family Restaurant is located.
WILLIAMS - An appeal by the owner of Jessica's Family Restaurant went unanswered Dec. 10 during the regular meeting of Williams City Council. Owner Greg Papas filed the appeal after city officials denied his request to build a wall on the south end of his property. Flagstaff Attorney Bill Ring represented Jessica's Restaurant at the meeting. Council members upheld the decision made by city employees to deny the wall during the meeting. Vice Mayor Don Dent and Mayor John Moore opposed the decision.
Williams City Planner Harry Holmes told council members that a number of safety issues factored into the decision to deny the permit.
"The administrative decision was made to deny that, based I believe, on fire and safety and sanitation accessibility to the property. The fence, which would go on the back of this restaurant property adjacent to the alley, would prevent large vehicles, such as sanitation and fire trucks, from passing through from the parking lot to the alley to properly service the restaurant and the adjoining property, the residential properties in the back," Holmes said.
Jessica's Family Restaurant is book-ended on Route 66 by two businesses, a motel and the Williams Police Department, the latter of which is a fenced property. Ring told those at the meeting that fencing property is an American property right.
"This is really a story of man who wants to fence his property," Ring told council members. "The West was settled by rugged individualists and, when I look at Bill Williams there in your city emblem, I see a rugged individualist."
He said the principle of private property is one that many should recognize.
"The ability to repel the trespasser is the quality that makes property private, not public," Ring said, adding that the question of access seems to be the root of the issue, as the alley is not complete through to Sixth Street.
"The street is right out there at the edge of the built part of the alley, but there's a drainage in the way," Ring said. "If you had finished the alley to the street, if you had just made the connection, then many of the objections that are made today would probably go away, but you don't want to do that. You want to use Greg's property for access because you have not finished the alley to the street. The objections that we've heard, on behalf of our client, are mainly objections of inconvenience."
City officials said that parking and signage issues played a factor in their decision to deny the permit as well, as they said those would have to be brought into conformance before a building permit can be issued. Ring, however, said the proposed wall would not change parking requirements in any way, nor affect the non-conformance of the property.
Councilman James Wurgler questioned if there was a precedent set for using the property for access to the alley due to the number of years that is has been used for that purpose.
"I'm not impressed with your argument about extending the alley to Sixth Street because it's not an appropriate thing for us to do," Wurgler said. "Putting that wall there, in my perspective, will clearly be in violation of jeopardizing the health, safety and welfare of the community and the people who occupy those areas. I'm saying that that property has been used for that purpose and you're saying we want to put a stop to it."
"What you're saying is the public has used my client's property for 40 or 50 years and we're going to claim it. You can't do that," Ring said.
Reader Comments
Posted: Sunday, December 27, 2009
Article comment by:
boggie man
Greg should just block the driveway with his motor home that he has been living in on the property illegally for the last 7 years. Still, why the city thinks they can use a parking lot as a way to exit the alley is wrong.
Posted: Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Article comment by:
William Ring
Thanks go to associate editor Mr. Whitehurst for recognizing the importance of private property and writing about it. If the City should want to use private property for a public purpose then the constitution requires condemnation and just compensation. That is what the issue is here. Your readers get it. The story is as old as the West and at the heart of what it means to be an Arizonan.
Posted: Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Article comment by:
city of non sense
They aren't using it to ACCESS the alley. They are using it to exit the alley, because the sanitation truck drivers are too lazy to back up after picking up the trash and turn south down the alley. This is BS.
Posted: Friday, December 18, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
